Abstract
In a reply to Jerome K. Vanclay’s manuscript “Impact Factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification?” we discuss the value of journal metrics for the assessment of scientific-scholarly journals from a general bibliometric perspective, and from the point of view of creators of new journal metrics, journal editors and publishers. We conclude that citation-based indicators of journal performance are appropriate tools in journal assessment provided that they are accurate, and used with care and competence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amin, M., & Mabe, M. (2000) SSP 22nd .ing, Baltimore (June, unpublished).
Bergstrom, C. (2007). Eigenfactor: Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. College & Research Libraries News, 68(5). Retrieved April 24, 2008, from www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/crlnews/backissues2007/may07/eigenfactor.cfm.
Bollen, J., Rodriguez, M. A., & Van De Sompel, H. (2006). Journal Status. Scientometrics, 69, 669–687.
Bollen, J., & Van de Sompel, H. (2008). Usage impact factor: the effects of sample characteristics on usage-based impact metrics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(1), 14.
Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (1988). World flash on basic research. Scientometrics, 13, 181–188.
Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2005). A Hirsch-type index for journals. The Scientist, 19, 8.
Colledge, L., De Moya-Anegón, F., Guerrero-Bote, V., López-Illescas, C., El Aisati, M., & Moed, H. F. (2010). SJR and SNIP: two new journal metrics in Elsevier’s scopus. UKSG Serials, 23, 215–221.
CrossCheck. (2012). http://www.crossref.org/crosscheck/index.html. Accessed 1 Feb 2012.
Davis, P. (2011). F1000 journal rankings—The map is not the territory. http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2011/10/05/f1000-journal-rankings-the-map-is-not-the-territory/. Accessed 1 Feb 2012.
Davis, P. (2012). Size and discipline bias ion F1000 journal rank. http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2012/01/27/size-and-discipline-bias-in-f1000-journal-rankings/. Accessed 1 Feb 2012.
Elsevier’s Editors Info. (2012). http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/editorshome.editors/joumeasures, http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/editorshome.editors/otherjoumeas, http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/editorsinfo.editors/info, http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/editorshome.editors/biblio. Accessed 1 Feb 2012.
F1000. (2012). http://f1000.com/about/whatis/factors#F1000-journal-rankings. Accessed 1 Feb 2012.
Garfield, E. (1964). The citation index—A new dimension in indexing. Science, 144, 649–654.
Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science, 178, 471–479.
Garfield, E. (1985). Uses and misuses of citation frequency. Current comments (October 28). In: Ghostwriting and other essays. Essays of an information scientist (Vol. 8, pp. 403–409). Philadelphia: ISI Press.
Garfield, E. (1996). How can impact factors be improved? British Medical Journal, 313, 411–413.
Garfield, E. (2005). The agony and the ecstasy: the history and meaning of the journal impact factor. Chicago: International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication. Retrieved September 16, 2005, from www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/jifchicago2005.pdf).
Glänzel, W. (2009). The multi-dimensionality of journal impact. Scientometrics, 78, 355–374.
Glänzel, W., & Moed, H. F. (2002). Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Scientometrics, 53(2), 171–194.
González-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2009). The SJR indicator: A new indicator of journals’ scientific prestige. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 379–391.
Guerrero-Bote, V. P. & Moya-Anegón, F. (2012). A further step forward in measuring journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR2 indicator. Retrieved January 24, 2012, from arxiv.org/pdf/1201.4639.pdf.
Hirsch, J.E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 16569–16572.
Huggett, S. (2012). F1000-Journal rankings: An alternative way to evaluate the scientific impact of scholarly communications. Research Trends, 26. http://www.researchtrends.com/issue26-january-2012/f1000-journal-rankings-an-alternative-way-to-evaluate-the-scientific-impact-of-scholarly-communications/. Accessed 1 Feb 2012.
Leydesdorff, L. & Opthof, T. (2010). Normalization at the field level: fractional counting of citations. Journal of Informetrics 4(4), 644–646.
Mahapatra, A. (2010). Deep impact: Scientific evaluation by the numbers. ACS Chem. Biol., 5, 715–717.
Marshakova-Shaikevich, I. (1996). The standard impact factor as an evaluation tool of science and scientific journals. Scientometrics, 35, 283–291.
Moed, H.F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation (p. 346). Dordrecht: Springer. ISBN 1-4020-3713-9.
Moed, H. F. (2010). Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 265–277.
Moed, H. F., & van Leeuwen, Th. N. (1996). Impact factors can mislead. Nature, 381, 186.
Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: theory, with application to the literature of physics. Information Processing and Management, 12, 297–312.
Pudovkin, A.I., & Garfield, E. (2004). Rank-normalized impact factor. A way to compare journal performance across subject categories. Paper presented at the ASIST meeting. Retrieved November 17, 2004, from http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/ asistranknormalization2004.pdf.
Reedijk, J. (2012a). Citation ethics. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 51(4), 828–830.
Reedijk, J. (2012b). Internal note. Leiden (January 2012).
Reedijk, J., & Moed, H. F. (2008). Is the impact of journal impact factors decreasing? J. Documentation, 64(2), 183–192.
Sen, B. K. (1992). Documentation note: Normalised impact factor. Journal of Documentation, 48, 318–325.
Sheldrick, G. M. (2008). A short history of SHELX. Acta Crystallographica Section A, 64, 112–122.
SNIP-SJR (2010). Instruction videos. http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLC477F10A4160BA09. Accessed 1 Feb 2012.
Spek, A. L. (2009). Structure validation in chemical crystallography. Acta Crystallographica Section D-Biological Crystallography, 65, 148–155.
Stringer, M. J., Sales-Pardo, M., & Amaral, L. A. N. (2008). Effectiveness of journal ranking schemes as a tool for locating information. PLoS ONE, 3(2), e1683. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001683.
Van Leeuwen, T. N., & Moed, H. F. (2002). Development and application of journal impact measures in the Dutch science system. Scientometrics, 53, 249–266.
Van Leeuwen, T.N., Moed, H.F., & Reedijk, J. (1997) JACS still topping angewandte chemie: Beware of erroneous impact factors. Chemical Intelligencer 32–36.
West, J., Althouse, B., Rosvall, M., Bergstrom, T., & Bergstrom, C. (2008). Eigenfactor: Detailed methods. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from www.eigenfactor.org/methods.pdf.
Zitt, M., & Small, H. (2008). Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59, 1856–1860.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moed, H.F., Colledge, L., Reedijk, J. et al. Citation-based metrics are appropriate tools in journal assessment provided that they are accurate and used in an informed way. Scientometrics 92, 367–376 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0679-8
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0679-8